Apple serves Sanho about connector designs!

[gunug]

QUOTE

Filed in a U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California, the suit divulges that Apple in fact notified Sanho of its infringement via official letters in April, May, and again in June of this year, according to AppleInsider. Sanho's HyperMac Nano, HyperMac Micro, and HyperMac Mini products for the iPod and iPhone are named in the suit. According to the filings, the patents infringed upon by Sanho are:

U.S. Patent No. 7,517,222 - "Magnetic Connector for Electronic Device"
U.S. Patent No. D618,189 - "Connector"
U.S. Patent No. 7,627,343 - "Media Player System"
U.S. Patent No. 7,751,853 - "Female Receptacle Data Pin Connector"
U.S. Patent No. 7,783,070 - "Cable Adapter for a Media Player System"
U.S. Patent No. D588,545 - "Connectors"

http://www.interconnectionworld.com/index/..._sanho_for.html

Sanho's basic position is that it's reusing Apple's own connectors in the sale of its own products.

I think my son has picked the "real" growth industry. . .lawyering!

[Xairbusdriver]

Sounds like "sour grapes" to me. But I can see the "rock and a hard place" that Apple finds itself. I am assuming, however, that Sanho either didn't ask or didn't receive permission to use the MagSafe connector. I think using parts from another companies product (whether it is a current model or not) to make your own is clearly illegal. That's one thing licensing agreements are for.

It's rather like a neighbor building a house next door but attaching the driveway to his garage by connecting to my driveway/curb-cut without even asking me. I might start to wonder why my cable signal is not as crisp as before they built, or why my water pressure is lower and why are those strips of grass running up to my house...

[gunug]

Gosh, XABD; you've got neighbors like I do! Magnetically locking a mechanism for an electrical connection is an "old" idea (science fiction and probably before that for prior art) and while I'm sure that Apple's patents are unassailable, at least in the eyes of their patent attorney, it might be an interesting court case if Sanho has deep enough pockets.

[Xairbusdriver]

In this case, it's not really the patents that are be used without permission, they make it explicitly clear on their web site that they are actually using the Apple manufactured MagSafe connector.

[krissel]

There's something called "the first sale doctrine" that allows you to use an item you legitimately purchased for anything, including selling it as part of another product.  But this is being assailed in many cases and if some court rulings are allowed to stand we may be prohibited from selling second hand a lot of items we think we now "own".

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/09/...le-doctrine.ars

Follow some of the links in the article and below to read other cases.

[Xairbusdriver]

Perhaps this could eventually get into the myth that a company/corporation has the same rights as an individual? [begin rant]What I do with anything I have purchased is not the same as a corporation buying hundreds/thousands of a device so it can use them or parts of them for it's own profit. Simply because an entity has more capital than an individual does not make that entity a "human." Ever. And I don't really care what the current Supreme Court says about political campaign spending.[End of rant]

Feel free to delete this post if it has crossed the three-forbidden-subjects line. The above is just my personal opinion, which no one actually asked for.